test
Here's one try, little different than the picture you sent me, but I had this one practically done. This shape needs an enclosure with internal height of 670mm to get a volume of 60l. You switch the direction of each layer giving you a really nice internal shape.
Do you have access to a printer that can print on 11x17" paper? I can send you a postscript or pdf and then you can print it out 1:1 scale.
Here's one try, little different than the picture you sent me, but I had this one practically done. This shape needs an enclosure with internal height of 670mm to get a volume of 60l. You switch the direction of each layer giving you a really nice internal shape.
Do you have access to a printer that can print on 11x17" paper? I can send you a postscript or pdf and then you can print it out 1:1 scale.
Attachments
MITMechE
OOOOOOooooooohhhh!!
670mm is close enough for me! Love the curvaceous internals
Using the patern you suggest I would have the correct capacity enclosure and a good pattern for rear sound wave dispersion.
I'll have to get this done at a printers but thats no biggy.
Many thanks.
My email button is below.
Luke123 is this close enough for the port/enclosure/driver?
Next......the wood work
OOOOOOooooooohhhh!!
670mm is close enough for me! Love the curvaceous internals
Using the patern you suggest I would have the correct capacity enclosure and a good pattern for rear sound wave dispersion.
I'll have to get this done at a printers but thats no biggy.
Many thanks.
My email button is below.
Luke123 is this close enough for the port/enclosure/driver?
Next......the wood work
Re: MITMechE
Dave, I like your mdf/ply combo idea. I was toying with the idea of throwing in the odd segment of Corian, Acrylic. Have you had any experience of sandwiching mdf and ply in a 'normally constructed' box or are you going on theory?
On the other hand, if the cabinets were a little wider and therefore not as deep (to compensate), the radiused front would probably have a better effect on the diffraction.JRKO said:
Dave, I like your mdf/ply combo idea. I was toying with the idea of throwing in the odd segment of Corian, Acrylic. Have you had any experience of sandwiching mdf and ply in a 'normally constructed' box or are you going on theory?
JRKO,
I didn't realize how big these things are, if you're going to print this out on one sheet, you'd need to use size "D" paper. At least here in the U.S. that's 22x34 inches.
I can make a whole bunch of plots that you can then lace back together, but it's not as clean. I won't get a chance to do that until later tomorrow probably.
I didn't realize how big these things are, if you're going to print this out on one sheet, you'd need to use size "D" paper. At least here in the U.S. that's 22x34 inches.
I can make a whole bunch of plots that you can then lace back together, but it's not as clean. I won't get a chance to do that until later tomorrow probably.
AAARRRGGGHHH
Her in doors is getting 'concerned'
about the size of these 'THINGS'
Is there any chance of a quick rehash of the cabs to make them more acceptable? Couldn't I stretch the height of the cabs at the sacrifice some of the width/depth?
After all they are going to be about 1050mm tall. With the current design I have 350mm ish spare at the bottom of the cabs.
Is volume the main consideration? Can changing the measurements but not the volume affect the sound that much?
Her in doors is getting 'concerned'
about the size of these 'THINGS'Is there any chance of a quick rehash of the cabs to make them more acceptable? Couldn't I stretch the height of the cabs at the sacrifice some of the width/depth?
After all they are going to be about 1050mm tall. With the current design I have 350mm ish spare at the bottom of the cabs.
Is volume the main consideration? Can changing the measurements but not the volume affect the sound that much?
The width of the baffle is fixed at 350mm right?
Given the width of the baffle I used a shape from another project based on a lute. (Similar to the Sonus Faber speakers)
I can definitely decrease the depth of the frame members, but the shape will change obviously. What I can do is make a drawing with less front curve and more back slope if that makes any sense (more similar to your original drawing).
I think you might want to give some thought to making this in two halves, i.e. left and right. The frames would be easier to cut and rout because there's no internal part to deal with. Plus you'd save money on mdf because you can fit more of the side frame members on a sheet of mdf.
If I were doing this project myself what I'd do is make it in four parts: there'd be two sides, a top cap flush routed to match exactly, and a separate front baffle. You said you'd like to wrap the front with red leather? A separate front baffle would allow you to do that easily, and then tuck the edges of the leather in the joint to the cabinet.
Given the width of the baffle I used a shape from another project based on a lute. (Similar to the Sonus Faber speakers)
I can definitely decrease the depth of the frame members, but the shape will change obviously. What I can do is make a drawing with less front curve and more back slope if that makes any sense (more similar to your original drawing).
I think you might want to give some thought to making this in two halves, i.e. left and right. The frames would be easier to cut and rout because there's no internal part to deal with. Plus you'd save money on mdf because you can fit more of the side frame members on a sheet of mdf.
If I were doing this project myself what I'd do is make it in four parts: there'd be two sides, a top cap flush routed to match exactly, and a separate front baffle. You said you'd like to wrap the front with red leather? A separate front baffle would allow you to do that easily, and then tuck the edges of the leather in the joint to the cabinet.
Luke123 said change the depth and width as I like but not the height. I dont fully understand why.
The front baffle would be easier to add as a seperate peice as I could have better access to the crossover etc.
The widht could be 255mm (the exact width of the driver) and upwards. The depth maybe 350mm to 400mm. If my math is correct that still gives plenty of room for volume give the total overall cab height of 1050mm.
MITMechE, when you say 2 sides and a top peice do you mean 2 translam sides, a top/bottom and a front baffle?
The front baffle would be easier to add as a seperate peice as I could have better access to the crossover etc.
The widht could be 255mm (the exact width of the driver) and upwards. The depth maybe 350mm to 400mm. If my math is correct that still gives plenty of room for volume give the total overall cab height of 1050mm.
MITMechE, when you say 2 sides and a top peice do you mean 2 translam sides, a top/bottom and a front baffle?
Well you do need a bottom. I guess I was thinking you'd glue that on whereas the top might have a different finish.
So yeah, basically two sepate translam sides, two cap pieces (top and bottom) and a front baffle.
This is just basically a bass reflex box right? I don't see why you can't change the height, just keep the internal volume the same.
So yeah, basically two sepate translam sides, two cap pieces (top and bottom) and a front baffle.
This is just basically a bass reflex box right? I don't see why you can't change the height, just keep the internal volume the same.
MITMechE
Just found your thread on curved laminate sided enclosures. I would earn brownie points with Mrs Osborne if this project came in at a reasonable price.
As I have yet to put metal to wood I can change construction route. Do you think that this method would be better than translam for an initial project?
The ply also gives a pretty finnish and I only have to cut about 8-12 pieces for the frame. To me that means the sides will be flat as I have about 40 less sections to stuff up!!
Just found your thread on curved laminate sided enclosures. I would earn brownie points with Mrs Osborne if this project came in at a reasonable price.
As I have yet to put metal to wood I can change construction route. Do you think that this method would be better than translam for an initial project?
The ply also gives a pretty finnish and I only have to cut about 8-12 pieces for the frame. To me that means the sides will be flat as I have about 40 less sections to stuff up!!
Easier? Well I'm not sure. The translam is definitely more time intensive, but technically easier I think.
Bending the plywood, even after I bought two sheets of expensive bending ply, was not an easy affair. I had to use a lot of pushing and banging and about 100 nails per piece I attached.
My cabinets were 46" tall, I don't think translam is a reasonable thing to do for something that tall unless you've got a friend with a cnc router.
Bending the plywood, even after I bought two sheets of expensive bending ply, was not an easy affair. I had to use a lot of pushing and banging and about 100 nails per piece I attached.
My cabinets were 46" tall, I don't think translam is a reasonable thing to do for something that tall unless you've got a friend with a cnc router.
Well I'm doing some curved speakers at the moment, and I considered Trans-lam, but just the bracing for my boxes took almost a sheet of MDF, so large speakers of that size would just waste WAY too much wood IMO.
IF I were to do things again, I would do the baffles the same, except maybe make the inside braces a bit "bulkier", and I would certainly not use 1/4 MDF for the sides. It is WAY to brittle, and after breaking a few sheets, I learned that it needed a few days to come to terms with being bent, and then it still took quite a few clamps and a lot of pressure to bend the panels tight.
Also since then I’ve found a really nice "exterior grade" plywood at lowes that is void free 1/4" and only $10 a sheet.
Also I’ve done a lot of playing with glue, carpet and flooring glue seem quite nice to use as they really dampen the cabinet. Partly why they do this so well is that they don’t really dry. Of course that is not good for things holding together. I’ve had to back everything up with screws. Construction adhesive worked really well, even though it was very hard to work with and seemed to skim over immediately. Poly type glue also seems to work well, but I’m still worried about it foaming up in areas where clamping pressure may not be optimal, also I think with a project the size I had, I would use close to $10 of glue per panel, (that’s $120 in gorilla glue, way to much).
Something I’d like to try would be a urethane-based glue/caulking, something like what is used for auto windows. It should be hard enough, and yet pliable, but without giving up its hold. Also I think I should just try some plain old wood glue, sometimes we feel that we need to reinvent the wheel, but laminators have been using that type of glue for years.
Anyways, thats my $0.002 worth
PS, for some help with making frame, or trans-lam bits the same, make one perfect, then use router flush trim bit to make as many copies as your little router and poor flush trim bearing can handle.
IF I were to do things again, I would do the baffles the same, except maybe make the inside braces a bit "bulkier", and I would certainly not use 1/4 MDF for the sides. It is WAY to brittle, and after breaking a few sheets, I learned that it needed a few days to come to terms with being bent, and then it still took quite a few clamps and a lot of pressure to bend the panels tight.
Also since then I’ve found a really nice "exterior grade" plywood at lowes that is void free 1/4" and only $10 a sheet.
Also I’ve done a lot of playing with glue, carpet and flooring glue seem quite nice to use as they really dampen the cabinet. Partly why they do this so well is that they don’t really dry. Of course that is not good for things holding together. I’ve had to back everything up with screws. Construction adhesive worked really well, even though it was very hard to work with and seemed to skim over immediately. Poly type glue also seems to work well, but I’m still worried about it foaming up in areas where clamping pressure may not be optimal, also I think with a project the size I had, I would use close to $10 of glue per panel, (that’s $120 in gorilla glue, way to much).
Something I’d like to try would be a urethane-based glue/caulking, something like what is used for auto windows. It should be hard enough, and yet pliable, but without giving up its hold. Also I think I should just try some plain old wood glue, sometimes we feel that we need to reinvent the wheel, but laminators have been using that type of glue for years.
Anyways, thats my $0.002 worth
PS, for some help with making frame, or trans-lam bits the same, make one perfect, then use router flush trim bit to make as many copies as your little router and poor flush trim bearing can handle.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.